Abstract
BackgroundBody mass estimation is of paramount importance for paleobiological studies, as body size influences numerous other biological parameters. In mammals, body mass has been traditionally estimated using regression equations based on measurements of the dentition or limb bones, but for many species teeth are unreliable estimators of body mass and postcranial elements are unknown. This issue is exemplified in several groups of extinct mammals that have disproportionately large heads relative to their body size and for which postcranial remains are rare. In these taxa, previous authors have noted that the occiput is unusually small relative to the skull, suggesting that occiput dimensions may be a more accurate predictor of body mass.ResultsThe relationship between occipital condyle width (OCW) and body mass was tested using a large dataset (2127 specimens and 404 species) of mammals with associated in vivo body mass. OCW was found to be a strong predictor of body mass across therian mammals, with regression models of Mammalia as a whole producing error values (~ 31.1% error) comparable to within-order regression equations of other skeletal variables in previous studies. Some clades (e.g., monotremes, lagomorphs) exhibited specialized occiput morphology but followed the same allometric relationship as the majority of mammals. Compared to two traditional metrics of body mass estimation, skull length, and head-body length, OCW outperformed both in terms of model accuracy.ConclusionsOCW-based regression models provide an alternative method of estimating body mass to traditional craniodental and postcranial metrics and are highly accurate despite the broad taxonomic scope of the dataset. Because OCW accurately predicts body mass in most therian mammals, it can be used to estimate body mass in taxa with no close living analogues without concerns of insufficient phylogenetic bracketing or extrapolating beyond the bounds of the data. This, in turn, provides a robust method for estimating body mass in groups for which body mass estimation has previously been problematic (e.g., “creodonts” and other extinct Paleogene mammals).
Highlights
Body mass estimation is of paramount importance for paleobiological studies, as body size influences numerous other biological parameters
Residuals of the regression equation are homoscedastic (Breusch-Pagal test for heteroscedasticity; BP = 0.13618; df = 1, p = 0.7121), as indicated by the scalelocation plot (Fig. 6a), but have a slight positive skew primarily due to several taxa that exhibit occiput morphology that deviates from the typical mammalian condition (Fig. 5a)
There are groups for which Occipital condyle width (OCW) does not accurately predict body mass, these groups are characterized by highly recognizable, specialized occiput morphology and can be identified as unsuitable for this method a priori, in contrast to other size proxies which require nearly complete remains to identify the discrepancy
Summary
Body mass estimation is of paramount importance for paleobiological studies, as body size influences numerous other biological parameters. Body mass has been traditionally estimated using regression equations based on measurements of the dentition or limb bones, but for many species teeth are unreliable estimators of body mass and postcranial elements are unknown This issue is exemplified in several groups of extinct mammals that have disproportionately large heads relative to their body size and for which postcranial remains are rare. Many groups of extinct mammals have disproportionately large heads relative to extant species (Fig. 1) This phenomenon has been most extensively discussed in extinct carnivorous mammals, such as sparassodonts [35, 36], mesonychians [37], and oxyaenid [38] and hyaenodont [32, 39] “creodonts,” as well as some extinct carnivorans such as amphicyonids [40, 41] and nimravids [39]. Given the disproportionately large heads of these taxa, body mass estimates based on craniodental regression equations derived from modern taxa are thought to overestimate body mass (see [32, 39, 56])
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
